Was every Google account equating to a Google+ account at that point?
It was invite-only for quite a long time, if memory serves.
I know Threads gets a lot of criticism here but the launch and growth rate are incredible nonetheless.
Isn't that because it's getting nag screened in Instagram? So people will be like "Yeah, ok, I guess I'll click this button to see what this is..."
Yeah, I’m sure a significant percentage are signing up but not staying active. That said, my feed is filled with content from people I follow. They did a great job engaging “influencers” (I hate that term) before the public launch.
I mean it's really not that impressive if you consider how it works. People just click "sign in with Instagram" and boom now they have a Threads account.
I have no doubt they will be successful though, considering the absolute shitshow that is Twitter now. I'd love to see their daily active users and revenue over the last few months.
@HughJanus@cyrusg On the revenue front, it's worth noting that all of Meta's social media apps basically share the same ad platform.
Every business that advertises on Facebook or Instagram (and there are many) already uses that ad platform.
I think a lot of social media marketing managers are waking up one morning discovering there's a new checkbox that's suddenly appeared in their Meta for Business ad campaigns.
Along with being able to select their ads appearing on Facebook or Insta, there's now a checkbox that says "Threads".
And, knowing Meta, it's on by default.
If the ad manager doesn't notice it, boom, their brand's ads are now appearing on Threads.
Given how much fashion brands love Instagram, my guess is that there's a lot of shoes and handbags being offered on Threads.
On the other side of the coin, given the number of brands that have abandoned Twitter, I can see how Threads could very quickly win the battle for ad dollars.
Threads does not support ads currently. Zuck said they will wait for 1B users.
@HughJanus Then that checkbox will appear one morning then.
Either way, it will almost certainly use Meta's existing ad platform. They won't create a separate one for Threads.
It will most likely be opt out.
And given how Elon has scared off many big advertisers, as long as Zuck maintains a decent number of MAUs, then I foresee Meta quickly gaining more revenue than Twitter.
this is why i find all the talk of "defederate threads" on lemmy a bit premature.
Meta isn't even thinking about the fediverse at this point, they're just using it as a buzzword. Their focus is on growth.
If that was the case they wouldn't have reached out to Mastodon instance owners a while ago before the launch.
First, "reaching out" is different from actually federating completely.
Second, i was referring to lemmy in particular. I know mastodon and lemmy are both part of the fediverse, but lemmy <> threads federation is a different conversation than mastodon <> threads.
Okay, let me specify: You said "Meta isn’t even thinking about the fediverse at this point [...]" which is demonstrably false. They reached out, so they're thinking about it.
Early numbers aren't everything.
Was every Google account equating to a Google+ account at that point?
It was invite-only for quite a long time, if memory serves.
I know Threads gets a lot of criticism here but the launch and growth rate are incredible nonetheless.
Isn't that because it's getting nag screened in Instagram? So people will be like "Yeah, ok, I guess I'll click this button to see what this is..."
Yeah, I’m sure a significant percentage are signing up but not staying active. That said, my feed is filled with content from people I follow. They did a great job engaging “influencers” (I hate that term) before the public launch.
I mean it's really not that impressive if you consider how it works. People just click "sign in with Instagram" and boom now they have a Threads account.
I have no doubt they will be successful though, considering the absolute shitshow that is Twitter now. I'd love to see their daily active users and revenue over the last few months.
@HughJanus @cyrusg On the revenue front, it's worth noting that all of Meta's social media apps basically share the same ad platform.
Every business that advertises on Facebook or Instagram (and there are many) already uses that ad platform.
I think a lot of social media marketing managers are waking up one morning discovering there's a new checkbox that's suddenly appeared in their Meta for Business ad campaigns.
Along with being able to select their ads appearing on Facebook or Insta, there's now a checkbox that says "Threads".
And, knowing Meta, it's on by default.
If the ad manager doesn't notice it, boom, their brand's ads are now appearing on Threads.
Given how much fashion brands love Instagram, my guess is that there's a lot of shoes and handbags being offered on Threads.
On the other side of the coin, given the number of brands that have abandoned Twitter, I can see how Threads could very quickly win the battle for ad dollars.
Threads does not support ads currently. Zuck said they will wait for 1B users.
@HughJanus Then that checkbox will appear one morning then.
Either way, it will almost certainly use Meta's existing ad platform. They won't create a separate one for Threads.
It will most likely be opt out.
And given how Elon has scared off many big advertisers, as long as Zuck maintains a decent number of MAUs, then I foresee Meta quickly gaining more revenue than Twitter.
this is why i find all the talk of "defederate threads" on lemmy a bit premature.
Meta isn't even thinking about the fediverse at this point, they're just using it as a buzzword. Their focus is on growth.
If that was the case they wouldn't have reached out to Mastodon instance owners a while ago before the launch.
First, "reaching out" is different from actually federating completely.
Second, i was referring to lemmy in particular. I know mastodon and lemmy are both part of the fediverse, but lemmy <> threads federation is a different conversation than mastodon <> threads.
Okay, let me specify: You said "Meta isn’t even thinking about the fediverse at this point [...]" which is demonstrably false. They reached out, so they're thinking about it.